Not feelings perhaps, but your failure to understand how the battleplanner works and what it's intended to do. As I (and others)
have shown with detailed screenshots and plans The battleplanner even can be used for encirclements, so easier broad large-scale operations is not an issue at all for it. Yet you still persist and claim it can't be used neither for large scale operations nor encirclements, and you still can't point out actual bugs with it instead just claiming lose things like "all of it is bad", "there are so many bugs you don't know where to start", or expects it to do things it was clearly never designed to do nor anyone reasonably could expect it to ( like know exactly which units should be used in exactly what terrain/situation and be able to plan ahead into complex massive offensives around this without any manual input needed at all ).
It's a broad tool, as I ( and PDX in their dev diaries ) have tried to explain for you. If you refuse to listen that it is your issue, not mine.
And if you complain that the AI opponent is so bad overall, the Battleplanner also allows you to ( if you want ) fight it on more even terms.
I do admit that it's a tool which GUI and clarity could be improved, that there are a few issues with very large or very narrow fronts, and that is finicky and tricky to understand how to use. But once you look at the overall picture it does pretty much do what it says on the box.
It also allows for way more complex operations then HoI3, so it's a good improvement. Anyone that contests this I hereby challenge to getting the AI in HoI3 to do encirclements like what I did linked above and what's done in the wiki guide, with zero manual input other then assigning units to AI control and setting AI targets. Have fun!
The battle planner can be used for encirclements as long as the operations go 3-5 provinces deep and 2 provinces wide. Remember what I said about
large-scale operations?
"have shown with detailed screenshots and plans..." Yeah, thanks for the detailed plan consisting of 2, non-overlapping straight offensive lines, as opposed to the one shown in the dev diary.
"Yet you still persist and claim it can't be used neither for large scale operations nor encirclements..." No, that is not what I'm saying. You seem to think the two are different. The planner is okay for small-sacle operations, like the one you showed. It's incapable of handling the even smaller encirclements that occur in large offensives, but I don't have a problem with that, as it was never promised. However, it is incapable of handling large-scale encirclements, like an attack against the Soviet Union, which was shown off in the dev diary.
I'm not claiming there are bugs. I'm claiming the system is lacking features. I don't get your obsession with bugs. You're not adressing my arguments, you're attacking a strawman. What Paradox promised pre-launch, an AI capable of handling large-scale operations and micromanaging panzers being a preference, and what they're saying post-launch, the battle planner being capable of handling general infantry advances and the blitz feature, designed for armoured operations being paid, are quite different. If I order a fish at a restaurant but get a chicken, then the waiter telling me "But sir, it's not overcooked!" is not really addressing my issue, is it?
" ...or expects it to do things it was clearly never designed to do nor anyone reasonably could expect it to ( like know exactly which units should be used in exactly what terrain/situation and be able to plan ahead into complex massive offensives around this without any manual input needed at all )." Yes, programming the AI to use mountaineers in the mountains and panzers in the field, or carrying out offensives
I planned for it is obviously asking too much.
"And if you complain that the AI opponent is so bad overall, the Battleplanner also allows you to ( if you want ) fight it on more even terms." So, what you're saying is that it doesn't matter that my AI opponent is designed horribly and incapable of posing a challenge, as I'm hindered by being given dysfunctional tools. That's some high-level game-design right there.
"I do admit that it's a tool which GUI and clarity could be improved, that there are a few issues with very large or very narrow fronts, and that is finicky and tricky to understand how to use. But once you look at the overall picture it does pretty much do what it says on the box." So what you're saying that it really is capable of handling one or two types of operations, and while it was promised to handle large-scale operations in general, it still does what was promised.
"It also allows for way more complex operations then HoI3, so it's a good improvement. Anyone that contests this I hereby challenge to getting the AI in HoI3 to do encirclements like what I did linked above and what's done in the wiki guide, with zero manual input other then assigning units to AI control and setting AI targets. Have fun!"
Did you actually play HOI3? I agree, it was impossible to get the AI to do anything. However, the tools for the still needed micromanagement, which were taken out and replaced by a disorganized list and a battle planner you can't use, allowed for a much quicker and less clumsy experience.
. It will work just as fine if not better if it's included.
